Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v12 4/6] tests/i915/i915_pm_dc: Added test for DC5 during DPMS

[Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>]

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 11:16:21PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote:
> From: Jyoti Yadav <jyoti.r.yadav@intel.com>
> 
> Added new subtest for DC5 entry during DPMS on/off cycle.
> During DPMS on/off cycle DC5 counter is incremented.
> 
> v2: Rename the subtest with meaningful name.
> v3: Rebased.
> v4: Addressed review comments by removing leftover code
>     cleanup().
> v5: Addressed the review comment by removing redundant
>     read_dc_counter() suggested by Imre.
>     Listing actual change in patch set changelog to make review easier.
> v6: Three way patch applied, no functional change.
> v7: Disabling runtime suspend for the platform which support, DC9.
>     rebased due to test name pm_dc changed to i915_pm_dc, aligning to
>     other PM tests.
> v8: Introduced setup_dc_dpms() in order to disable runtime pm, restoring
>     POWER_DIR values to its original and enabling runtime pm  for other
>     followed sub-tests.
> v9: Check DC5 counter value after DPMS off, broke the dpms_on_off
>     function to dpms_on and dpms_off. [Imre]
> v10:Added AT_LEAST_Gen11 condition instead of IS_ICELAKE in order to
>     disable runtime suspend. [Imre]
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jyoti Yadav <jyoti.r.yadav@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>
> ---
>  tests/i915/i915_pm_dc.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 62 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/i915/i915_pm_dc.c b/tests/i915/i915_pm_dc.c
> index f261ecbf..f03d30a8 100644
> --- a/tests/i915/i915_pm_dc.c
> +++ b/tests/i915/i915_pm_dc.c
> @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ typedef struct {
>  	enum psr_mode op_psr_mode;
>  	drmModeModeInfo *mode;
>  	igt_output_t *output;
> +	bool runtime_suspend_disabled;
>  } data_t;
>  
>  bool dc_state_wait_entry(int drm_fd, int dc_flag, int prev_dc_count);
> @@ -173,6 +174,62 @@ static void test_dc_state_psr(data_t *data, int dc_flag)
>  	cleanup(data);
>  }
>  
> +static void setup_dc_dpms(data_t *data)
> +{
> +	if (IS_BROXTON(data->devid) || IS_GEMINILAKE(data->devid) ||
> +	    AT_LEAST_GEN(data->devid, 11)) {
> +		data->runtime_suspend_disabled = igt_disable_runtime_pm();
> +		igt_require_f(data->runtime_suspend_disabled,
> +			      "unable to disable runtime pm for i915\n");
> +	} else {
> +		data->runtime_suspend_disabled = false;
> +	}
> +}
> +
> +static void dpms_off(data_t *data)
> +{
> +	for (int i = 0; i < data->display.n_outputs; i++) {
> +		kmstest_set_connector_dpms(data->drm_fd,
> +					   data->display.outputs[i].config.connector,
> +					   DRM_MODE_DPMS_OFF);
> +	}
> +
> +	if (!data->runtime_suspend_disabled)
> +		igt_assert(igt_wait_for_pm_status
> +			   (IGT_RUNTIME_PM_STATUS_SUSPENDED));
> +}
> +
> +static void dpms_on(data_t *data)
> +{
> +	for (int i = 0; i < data->display.n_outputs; i++) {
> +		kmstest_set_connector_dpms(data->drm_fd,
> +					   data->display.outputs[i].config.connector,
> +					   DRM_MODE_DPMS_ON);
> +	}
> +
> +	if (!data->runtime_suspend_disabled)
> +		igt_assert(igt_wait_for_pm_status
> +			   (IGT_RUNTIME_PM_STATUS_ACTIVE));
> +}
> +
> +static void test_dc_state_dpms(data_t *data, int dc_flag)
> +{
> +	uint32_t dc_counter;
> +
> +	dc_counter = read_dc_counter(data->drm_fd, dc_flag);
> +	dpms_off(data);
> +	check_dc_counter(data->drm_fd, dc_flag, dc_counter);
> +	dpms_on(data);
> +
> +	/* if runtime PM is disabled for i915 restore it,
> +	 * so any other sub-test can use runtime-PM.
> +	 */
> +	if (data->runtime_suspend_disabled) {
> +		igt_restore_runtime_pm();
> +		igt_setup_runtime_pm();
> +	}

The above restores what setup_dc_dpms() did so could you move it a
cleanup_dc_dpms() function for clarity?

> +}
> +
>  int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>  {
>  	bool has_runtime_pm;
> @@ -210,6 +267,11 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>  		test_dc_state_psr(&data, CHECK_DC6);
>  	}
>  
> +	igt_subtest("dc5-dpms") {
> +		setup_dc_dpms(&data);

Could you move the above call to test_dc_state_dpms() and check for
CHECK_DC5 withing setup_dc_dpms()?

I couldn't spot any other issues so with these changes on the patchset:
Reviewed-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>

Could you please resend the whole patchset?

> +		test_dc_state_dpms(&data, CHECK_DC5);
> +	}
> +
>  	igt_fixture {
>  		close(data.debugfs_fd);
>  		display_fini(&data);
> -- 
> 2.21.0
> 
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev